Bennett v. Antinnucci et al
Plaintiff: Jackie S. Bennett
Defendant: Denise Antinnucci, Cheryl Freimuth and James Crane
Case Number: 1:2016cv00423
Filed: December 16, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana
Office: Fort Wayne Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Susan L Collins
Presiding Judge: Rudy Lozano
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 16, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 97 OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 90 MOTION for Entry of Judgment under Rule 54(b) As To Counts III-VIII by Defendant United States of America and 91 MOTION to Alter Judgment Under Rule 59(e) by Defendant James Crane. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter final judgment in favor of the United States of America and James Crane and against Plaintiff. With all other Defendants having previously been dismissed from this matter, the Clerk is further DIRECTED to close this case. Signed by Judge Holly A Brady on 9/16/2020. (lhc)
July 21, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 86 OPINION AND ORDER: GRANTING in part and DENYING in part 78 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants James Crane, United States of America. Summary judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff is granted with respect to Counts IV, VI, and VII. Summary judgment is denied with respect to Count II. Signed by Judge Holly A Brady on 7/21/2020. (lhc)
April 24, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 68 OPINION AND ORDER Because Bennett unduly delayed in bringing her motion to amend, and because the claim in Count III of the proposed amended complaint is futile, the Court DENIES 66 Bennett's third motion to amend complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan L Collins on 4/24/19. (kjp)
November 20, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 53 OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART 45 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM. Defendants Antinucci and Freimuth are dismissed as Defendants. Count II remains pending against Defendant Crane. Counts VI and VII remain pending against the United States, and Count IV remains pending as to potential damages. Signed by Chief Judge Theresa L Springmann on 11/20/18. (ksp)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Indiana Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Bennett v. Antinnucci et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jackie S. Bennett
Represented By: George Sistevaris
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Denise Antinnucci
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Cheryl Freimuth
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: James Crane
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?